THE OFFICIAL NEWSLETTER OF EDCHOICE • ISSUE 1: FALL 2016
WELCOME TO
EDCHOICE
THANKS,
MILTON
STATE OF
SCHOOL
CHOICE
WHAT THE
FUTURE
HOLDS
PRESIDENT’S LETTER
By Robert C. Enlow
Earlier this year, we announced that we’d
be changing our name from the Friedman
Foundation for Educational Choice to something
that would both celebrate our past and better
reflect our future.
Of course, this got me thinking about my first few
meetings with Milton and Rose Friedman and
how lucky I was to be involved with their legacy
foundation. Those meetings seem like so long ago,
but the lessons resonate every day: be rigorous
and never be satisfied with limited freedom.
These are the same lessons and attitudes that were
in plain sight when, on July 29, we announced
that we are now EdChoice.
It’s our new name—and it’s the big idea that drives
us to fight for K–12 students and families across
America.
Our mission is simple: We are champions of
choice who believe that empowering all families
with full and unencumbered educational choice is
the best pathway to successful lives and a stronger
society.
When we started 20 years ago, there were only five
educational choice programs serving fewer than
10,000 students. Today, there are 61 programs
in 30 states and the District of Columbia serving
more than 400,000 students. But the choices are
not equal, and they are certainly not big enough.
Using our rigorous research and unparalleled
experience, we already know what works. Our
plan is to usher in a new era of educational choice
programs built to serve every student and ensure
that all families have access to schooling that
meets their needs.
Although we will no longer be using their name,
we will never lose sight of universal school choice
as the Friedmans’ intellectual legacy. We have
been honored to be their legacy foundation since
1996 and to be the nation’s only organization
solely dedicated to promoting their concept of
educational choice. We are honoring their wishes
by ceasing to use their names.
As David Friedman said at our 10th and final
Friedman Legacy Day celebration on July 29, “I
came here tonight to make it clear this is not a
matter of rejection of my parents but doing what
they wanted done.” They believed in the power of
their idea and the work of EdChoice.
The Friedmans believed that government has
a responsibility to educate the public, but that
doesn’t mean writing every child a mandatory
prescription for “public school.” That decision
should be up to parents, who now have more
options than ever before thanks to new school
types, technologies and learning environments.
We trust families to know their kids better than
bureaucrats, and we trust they will invest wisely
in their educational futures. We know we’ll have
to be unrelenting to reach our goal. As we move
forward, EdChoice will focus on three main areas
to advance high-quality school choice programs
across the United States.
We will educate new and diverse audiences about
the value of school choice. We will train and equip
advocates with the skills they need to rise up and
fight for students. And we will engage at the state
level to advance programs that offer the most
flexibility for all families.
Thank you, Milton and Rose, for giving us the
powerful idea that parents should be in the
educational driver’s seat.
The engine is revving. It’s time to buckle up. We’ve
only just begun.
Welcome to EdChoice.
WHERE WE’VE BEEN
“The major objective of educational vouchers
is much more ambitious. It is to drag education
out of the 19th century—where it has been mired
for far too long—and into the 21st century, by
introducing competition on a broad scale.”
slowly. There were other cities that followed
Milwaukee’s lead, and a few states adopted small
programs. Then came 2011, famously dubbed the
“year of school choice” by the Wall Street Journal
and other media outlets.
Nobel laureate Milton Friedman had a vision for
schooling in America that would put parents,
not bureaucrats, in the driver’s seat. He believed
that government is responsible for funding, but
not necessarily providing, an education for every
child.
More than a dozen states adopted school choice
programs that year, including Indiana, which is
home to the nation’s largest voucher program,
and Arizona, which adopted flexible education
savings accounts that are now widely regarded as
the future of the movement.
Twenty years ago, when he and his wife, Rose,
established the Friedman Foundation for
Educational Choice, his vision became our
mission.
That brings us to today. There currently are 62
educational choice programs in 30 states and the
District of Columbia, and public support for school
choice continues to grow. Sadly, Dr. Friedman did
not live to see the full implementation of the big
idea he first wrote about in 1955, but his legacy
burns bright as we move forward.
School choice in America is nothing new. After all,
families who can afford it have always been able
to buy or rent homes in neighborhoods with highquality public schools. But what about those who
can’t? The key to success is access.
Dr. Friedman believed that knocking down
barriers would benefit society as a whole; all
families, not just those with the ability to move,
should be able to direct the funds set aside to
educate their children.
The first modern voucher program in America was
a small, local effort in Milwaukee that got started
in 1990. For nearly 20 years, the movement grew
“Our goal is to have a system in which every family
in the U.S. will be able to choose for itself the
school to which its children go. We are far from
that ultimate result. If we had that—a system
of free choice—we would also have a system of
competition, innovation, which would change the
character of education.”
As we continue our work under a new name, we
cherish Dr. Friedman’s words—and his powerful
vision for a system of education that serves and
empowers all families.
WE’VE COME A LONG WAY
In 1996, there wasn’t much choice in education. But over the last 20 years, our organization has helped
transform schooling in America. A lot has happened since we got going, and today, we are widely regarded
as the number one research organization in the movement and the leading advocates of educational
choice for all families. And we’re just getting started.
Voucher
Education Savings Account
Tax-Credit Scholarship
Tax Credits and Deductions
More than
400,000
children using school
choice programs
40
62
percent of children in schools
not assigned by ZIP Code
educational choice
programs enacted
VT
NH
RI
MD
DC
120
1,000
research
reports
and
counting
legislators trained
Up
to
$5.1
billion taxpayer
dollars saved
WHO WE ARE
AND WHAT WE DO
EdChoice. It’s a big and powerful idea—
and it’s the new name of our organization.
OUR MISSION
The EdChoice mission is to advance educational
freedom and choice for all as a pathway to
successful lives and a stronger society.
EDUCATE
EdChoice is a national leader in school choice research. We publish dozens of studies,
surveys, legislative analyses and blog posts each year to help the public, the media
and key stakeholders understand how school choice is affecting families and students
across the United States and internationally. Our premise is simple: The more people
know about and understand educational choice, the more they can help advance the
movement.
Learn more at www.edchoice.org/Research
TRAIN AND EQUIP
For too long, parents have been told to sit down, be quiet and let the professionals
handle their kids. Policymakers have similarly been bullied by those who seek to
protect and preserve an educational system that has chronically failed many of those
who most depend on it as their pathway to a successful life. We offer a selection of
trainings to help school choice supporters learn how to advocate for high-quality
programs that put students first.
Learn more at www.edchoice.org/Training
ENGAGE
We know from experience that bringing new school choice programs to fruition takes
a lot of hard work, and we know true educational choice faces long odds in places
where allegiance to the past comes before serving students. That’s why we’re focused
on engaging at the state level where it makes the most sense while supporting school
choice efforts more broadly with our research, outreach and trainings.
Learn more at www.edchoice.org/StateWork
WHAT’S IN A NAME
Our new logo embodies our new organization with its sleek, modern design and bold
colors. It also reflects the personality of EdChoice. It took more than a year to arrive
at a look that encapsulates who we are as well as what we’re trying to accomplish.
We believe it’s the perfect representation of all that we’ve done—and all that’s yet to
come.
NEW LOGO BREAKDOWN
Education is trapped in a box but it
is beginning to emerge
Choice is bold and
so is the font
The lean of script font is propelling
education toward choice
Choice is thinking
outside the box
As we look toward a nation where educational
choice is more universal and available than ever
before, we will embrace our mission and our
core values:
We are intellectually honest.
We are trusted experts.
We are nonpartisan.
We are forward thinking.
We are optimistic.
NATION CELEBRATES THE 10TH
AND FINAL FRIEDMAN LEGACY DAY
Relive the day as we share some
of the highlights from our big
Indianapolis event.
For 20 years, the Friedman Foundation proudly
advanced Milton and Rose D. Friedman’s vision
of educational choice for all families. This year,
we got a new name—EdChoice—and celebrated
the 10th and final Friedman Legacy Day by saying
thanks to the Friedmans one last time.
EdChoice President and CEO Robert Enlow
announces the organization’s new name.
Milton and Rose Friedman’s son David explains
that the name change is in keeping with his
parents’ wishes.
WE ARE GRATEFUL TO ALL THE SUPPORTERS
WHO HELPED US CELEBRATE THIS YEAR
Catherin Leonardi
Mark Richards
Maurice McNicholas
William Wessinger
Douangmala Khounnavongsa
Timothy Brothers
James Marotta
Curtis Everett
Jeffrey Warner
John Klawiter
Brice Vickery
Petron Konar
Brigid O’Neill
Rueben Riemer
John Duckworth
Thomas Finch
Donald MacDonald
Living Trust
Elliott Grayson
John Duckworth
Sharel Stager
Beverly Peterson
J. Seckelmann
Duane Enger
William Olivito
Joseph Carpenito
Jim Harris
Steven Kaatz
Judith Flohr
Evelyn Rehagen
Carmen Perry
Stanley S. Harris Trust
Frank Walterscheid
Earl Rondin
Betty Ernst
George Evans
Gladys Abell
Charles Moon
Donald Robinson
Larry Johnson
Bjorn Eek
Thomas Jakubowski
Samuel McEldowney
Alan Campbell
William McNagny
Margaret Chase
John Corothers
Rochelle Pearl
Mary Ellen Stroup
Willie Hardison
Paul Schauwecker
Robert Fennell
William Albers
George Hutter
Helen Goltl
Michael Phillips
Charles Sarahan
Bertram Siegel
James Perry
Robert Galgan
James Schul
Roger Passarella
D. Swindle
Stewart Mathis
Nicholas Mastroianni
H. Ford
Dean Scalia
Lyman Parrigin
David Parker
Joanne Aarseth
Stephen Davidson
Wendell Freeman
Rick Whitener
Douglas McKissack
Robert Silverman
Jarold Evans
Arline Akina
Lawrence Fauci
Brian Kelly
Ann Doege
Ralph Childs
Norma Dorfner
Bruce Mowat
John Kirchmann
David Anderson
Michael Brockelman
David McMillan
Arthur Margulis
Harriet Chase
Leigh Johnson
Michael Crucitt
Peter Knapp
Michael Vanderveen
John Musker
John Hazel
Ronald Tellier
Edwin Manske
Frederick Thatcher
Stephen Elkins
Albert Richardson
Frederick Geissinger
J. McGraw
Richard Cooley
Francis Sheahen
Mark Clinard
Wyatt Haskell
Robert Pruger
Luis Mola
John Creedon
Benjamin Bernstein
Dennis Marten
Warren Roberts
Richard Marx
Richard Marx
Henry McDonnell
John Cross
Robert Gatliff
David Ihle
Sylvia Kosciolek
Arlene Nickerson
Thomas Reilly
Virgil Cicoria
John Kirscher
Dr. & Mrs. Richard A. Bilas
Jeanne Jennings
Marvin Koeper
Nick Runnebohm
Richard Timberlake
Jim Hicks
Everett Berg
Donald Dunn
Phyllis Nicholas
George Shultz
John Ackerman
Kurt St. Angelo
The Cly-Del Manufacturing
Company
FROM STATUS QUO DEFENDER
TO EDUCATIONAL CHOICE ADVOCATE
This educator of 15 years is ready to share her story and
inspire other teachers to speak out.
By Gretchen Davies
School choice. The term was demonized in my
teacher credentialing courses and by my own
mother, who had been teaching in public schools
since she was 20 years old. Everyone was doing it,
so I toed the line as well, but only for a short while.
My Ah-Ha Moment
My first teaching assignment was in an innercity elementary school, where 100 percent of the
students were in the free and reduced-price lunch
program and all but one of my students was an
English Language Learner. The school was under
a lot of scrutiny by district officials to raise test
scores. Feeling the pressure, I dug in.
I remember one specific lesson, a language arts
lesson during our uninterrupted three-hour daily
block of language arts, regarding spelling patterns.
I recalled reviewing the lesson the day before
and thinking of my students, how disengaging
the lesson would be, especially for an “at-risk”
population, so I decided to implement different
learning modalities into my lesson.
The lesson itself dictated I write the words on the
board and read them aloud, and then refer to the
alphabet chart, sounding out each letter while they
sat, stationary, absorbing it all. This lesson aligned
with the presumption that my fifth graders could
not read or write and, thus, must be delivered via
this scripted curriculum in my hands.
I looked out into my classroom of 36 students,
eyes glazed over from boredom and hunger, and
altered the lesson right then and there.
I printed out the words, affixed sticky tape to the
back and distributed them at random to each
group. I told the students to try to read the words
together and make sense of them and then discern
if there was any pattern. Even my most struggling
students were engaged in the lesson for once. Just
then, a district official walked in, and by lunchtime,
I had a letter in hand stating I was being placed on
an improvement plan. Apparently, I didn’t know
how to teach.
I looked at my classroom of struggling children,
the ones statistics say often drop out and continue
generational poverty, and my heart ached. My
students were not failing school; school was failing
them, and I didn’t want to be a part of it.
What It’s Like “Switching Sides”
I do not have anything against public school,
although it may seem so. I am against banning
school choice.
I came to this realization when looking at my
newborn and thinking, do I want him to attend
the local public school? If not, are there other
options? With few options at my disposal, I felt
stuck. If I could not afford the only local private
school, or did not like their school, I would have to
enroll my son in what I considered a failing school,
and this felt unjust.
Sadly, I am seen by others in my field as the
minority for my support of school choice.
Many teachers feel that school choice is a ploy to
destroy public education to prevent those without
excess income from getting an education or that
it is against the separation of church and state
(when speaking of vouchers) or that public school
teachers will be left without a job. In districts
where school choice is allowed, I have not seen
these fears become reality.
I hope there are more teachers who share my
opinion but perhaps are just kept quiet for fear of
retribution. Unfortunately, I haven’t met any, and
that is probably because I, too, have kept quiet, so
that I am not chastised by my mentors and peers.
However, I have grown tired of being quiet. I care
about and rally for the best educational options
for children, which is why I chose to work in
education.
As my oldest child approaches kindergarten,
I dread the day he has to attend our assigned
neighborhood school; it is not a good fit for him.
I know my son best, and I know that school choice
will allow him to attend the school in which he can
best learn, grow and thrive—a school not chosen
by an arbitrary boundary map but by the expertise
of a stakeholder—in this case myself, his mother.
If we as a nation were to ban school choice, it would
be a social injustice. Students do not deserve to
attend a school that—even if it is not “failing” all
kids—doesn’t work for them. All children deserve
a choice to seek the best educational fit for their
needs.
SYNTHESIS OF 100 EMPIRICAL SCHOOL
CHOICE STUDIES FINDS POSITIVE OUTCOMES
As educational choice grows, so does the evidence proving it works.
In the fourth edition of our flagship report—A
Win-Win Solution: The Empirical Evidence on
School Choice—author Dr. Greg Forster says,
Of the 33 studies on the topic, 31 find a positive
effect; one finds no visible effect; one finds a
negative effect.
“Twenty years ago, before this body of evidence
existed, there was some excuse for making policy
based on speculation, anecdotal observation, and
intuition. Today, the effects of these programs
are known, and there is no longer any excuse for
policymakers and opinion leaders to be ignorant of
the facts.”
It is important to note that the one negative finding
in this category is hard to explain given that nine
other studies find a positive effect from the same
voucher program. That study’s authors even say,
“Despite the exhaustive data available, we are not
currently able to explain the negative effect of the
threat on reading performance definitively.”
When we published this report in 2009, only 19
studies existed on the effects of school choice.
Since then, opponents of school choice have built
up their arsenal of false claims in their efforts to
misinform and drive down support. Now, 100
empirical school choice studies from across the
country are available to bring us closer to the
truth.
WHAT OPPONENTS SAY: School choice “siphons”
money from public schools at the expense of kids
and taxpayers.
WHAT OPPONENTS SAY: School choice doesn’t
improve outcomes for students.
THE TRUTH: The majority of gold-standard
studies of school choice programs find kids do
better with school choice. Of the 18 randomassignment studies on the topic, 14 show positive
effects; two show no visible effect; two show
negative effects.
This edition of A Win-Win Solution is the first to
feature studies that find negative effects on choice
participants. Both of those studies examined
the same program—the Louisiana Scholarship
Program. The reports show student deficits in the
program’s first year, but student improvement
in its second year. Because its results appear to
be anomalistic, researchers are watching this
program closely. For a more thorough breakdown
of that study’s findings and what they mean for
parents and policymakers, visit our blog at www.
edchoice.org/LAoutcomes.
WHAT OPPONENTS SAY: School choice hurts the
students “left behind” in public schools.
THE TRUTH: Nearly every study on the topic,
even those conducted by anti-school choice
organizations, shows school choice programs
drive academic improvements in public schools.
THE TRUTH: Every fiscal study ever conducted
finds school choice has either a positive or no
visible effect on taxpayers and public schools,
meaning most programs save money. Of the 28
studies included in A Win-Win Solution, 25 show
a positive effect; three show no visible effect; none
show a negative effect.
WHAT OPPONENTS SAY: School choice worsens
racial segregation in schools.
THE TRUTH: Public schools are more segregated
now than they were in the 1960s, according to Gary
Orfield, an education professor and co-director of
the Civil Rights Project. Not one study has ever
found school choice causes segregation in schools.
Actually, data show school choice programs help
students leave more segregated schools to join
more integrated schools. Of the 10 empirical
studies on the topic, nine show a positive effect;
one shows no visible effect; none show a negative
effect.
WHAT OPPONENTS SAY: Private schools have a
bad influence on kids.
THE TRUTH: Many studies find school choice
programs have a positive effect on students’ civic
values, including tolerance for the rights of others,
likelihood to vote or volunteer and more. Of the
11 studies on the topic, eight find a positive effect;
three find no visible effect; none find a negative
effect. In fact, one study finds school choice
reduces the likelihood of a student engaging in
criminal activity after graduation.
THE EDUCATIONAL CHOICE TRACK RECORD: HALL OF FAME NUMBERS
ANY POSITIVE
EFFECT
NO VISIBLE
EFFECT
ANY NEGATIVE
EFFECT
Academic Outcomes of Choice Participants
14
2
2
Academic Outcomes of Public Schools
31
1
1
Fiscal Impact on Taxpayers and Public Schools
25
3
0
Racial Segregation in Schools
9
1
0
Civic Values and Practices
8
3
0
87
10
3
TOTAL
CHANGE SERVICE REQUESTED
111 Monument Circle | Suite 2650
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Advancing educational
freedom and choice for all as
a pathway to successful lives
and a stronger society.